nwo context the case of the markermeer - ijmeer towards operationalisation 7 september bas waterhout...

NWO ContextThe case of the Markermeer - IJmeer

Towards operationalisation

7 September

Bas Waterhout – TU Delft

Contents

• Part 1 – Current situation • Part 2 – Brief history• Part 3 – Issues • Part 4 – Towards an operationalisation

Part 1 – Current situation

Source: RRAAM Brief 2009, p29

Source: RRAAM Brief 2009, p29

3 challenges:Green-Blue system

Source: RRAAM Brief 2009, p35

Source: RRAAM Brief 2009, p37

Source: RRAAM Brief 2009, p39

Source: RRAAM Brief 2009, p43-47

Five alternatives

Source: RRAAM Brief 2009, p55

July 2012:

Three alternatives for consultation

Source: RRAAM, July 2012, pp 27-30

July 2012

Indication of Optimised TBES – ‘Future Proof’ Ecological System

Land-water transition zones (large scale marsh lands)

Sheltered zone around Hoorn (silt control and clear water)

Optimal ground flows (sand extraction and nature development)

Synergies with dyke reinforcement

Fish passages and seasonal water levels

Source: RRAAM, July 2012, pp 32

Part 2 – A brief History 1960 - 2012

Source: RRAAM Brief 2009, p31

A brief history: how it all begun

1992 – IJburg 1: Referendum 1997

2004 – Verkenning IJmeer: some wise men...

2006 – Noordvleugel brief (Randstad Urgent)

2009 – Toekomstbeeld Markermeer-IJmeer2009 – RRAAM

2012 – Consultation report

2005 – Visie IJmeer

2010 – Werkmaatschappij Markermeer-IJmeer

2007 – Toekomst perspectief Markermeer-IJmeer

2004 – IJburg 2: Land use plan annulled

Part 3 - Issues

Central Regulation• Bird and Habitat Directives

– Markermeer – IJmeer Bird protection zone

• Water framework Directive– Clear water as from 2015

Source: Ecoshape projecthttp://www.ecoshape.nl/en_EN/project.html/environment/104-Delta+Lakes/project/133-MIJ+2.1+-+Project+summary

The Markermeer: A bathtub?

ANT: Autonomous Negative Trend

A deteriorating ecological system

SlobeendKrooneend

Aalscholvers

Geoorde Fuut

Kuifeend

Tafeleend

Fontijnkruid in Gooimeer by Huizen 2012, Source: Gooi & Eemlander 30 juli 2012: ‘Ecoblunder in Eemmeer’ http://www.gooieneemlander.nl/regionaal/eemland/article16951573.ece/Eco-blunder-in-Eemmeer?lref=sll

Kranswier

Driehoeksmossel

Werkmaatschappij Markermeer - IJmeer

RWS

DG Water

Min I&M

DG Ruimte DG

Natuur

Min ELI

National gov stakeholder

Zuiderzeeland – Water boards

StaatsbosbeheerANWB

Natuurmonumenten

Non-gov stakeholders

Provincie Flevoland

Provincie Noord Holland

Regional gov stakeholders

AlmereAmsterdam

Lelystad Waterland

Local gov stakeholders

EU: DG ENV

Other stakeholders:-Pressure groups-Recreation- private companies

Landsadvocaat

Parallel policy tracks

• Deltaprogramme – water safety• IJsselmeer Policy Report 2006• Natura 2000 Maintanance plan

Part 4 – Towards operationalisation

Early Observations• Central regulation, i.c. the Birds and Habitat directives, does not obstruct pro-active and

integrative area based solutions. At the regional level this path is followed and generates broad support.

• At the national level it seems more difficult to embark on an area-based pro-active and integrative approach, which is partly due to the financial consequences.

• Hypothesis: sectoral regulation leads to further institutionalising of sectoral organisationstructure at the national level.

• Meta-governance frameworks such as Randstad Urgent and RRAAM (which is part of

MIRT – another meta-governance framework) are quite productive in stimulating region cooperation, but less effective in terms of relating regional to national stakeholders. Design errors in the RRAAM and Randstad Urgent set of playing rules allow the national administration to sit aside and judge the efforts of the regional level, whereas effective meta-governance seems to rely on a condition of inclusiveness also of the meta-governor (Reff Petersen et al. 2010).

Research questions for the Markermeer – IJmeer case

1. How have the EU Birds and Habitat directive and the EU Water Framework Directive been transposed, implemented and enforced in the Netherlands and how has this affected the interpretation of this central regulation?

2. How has meta-governance influenced the process and contents of the Markermeer-IJmeer strategies and under what conditions can meta-governance contribute to relating central regulation to local interactive practices?

3. Are there mechanisms at the national level that cause central regulation to be interpreted, action and organisation which hamper area oriented policy making?

4. How is dealt with the uncertainty about how the ecological system operates in relation to jurisprudence and how does this affect policymaking?

5. How does the legal system, in particular access to the legal system, impact upon the policy process?

6. What is the origin of the parrallel policy tracks (natura 2000 beheerplan, IJsselmeergebied nota, Deltaprogramme, TMIJ) dealing with the same region and impacting upon each?